Obama opens up to offshore drilling:
The Obama administration is proposing to open vast expanses of water along the Atlantic coastline, the eastern Gulf of Mexico and the north coast of Alaska to oil and natural gas drilling, much of it for the first time, officials said Tuesday.
Under the plan, the coastline from New Jersey northward would remain closed to all oil and gas activity. So would the Pacific Coast, from Mexico to the Canadian border.
The proposal — a compromise that will please oil companies and domestic drilling advocates but anger some residents of affected states and many environmental organizations — would end a longstanding moratorium on oil exploration along the East Coast from the northern tip of Delaware to the central coast of Florida, covering 167 million acres of ocean.
Yet another flip-flop by the President, but at this point nobody in the media or the Obama sycophants in the blogosphere appear too concerned about that. Obama is a “D” after all.
But I’m a bit more cynical than that.
This is, effectively, home state pork for Conservadem Senators who are viewed as winnable votes on the energy bill. Five of the original fifteen Conservadems are listed above (Webb and Graham are not Conservadems). Of course, since the new offshore drilling policy will operate through the executive branch, there is no guarantee at all that the Obama administration will actually get an energy bill out of this deal. Nonetheless, and leaving aside the political efficacy of this ploy, it is clearly a political move designed to make a bill more viable.
This makes sense. I think the White House has cap-and-trade next on the agenda. Winning the healthcare fight was huge, but I don’t think Obama wants another long and drawn out battle like that again–especially as we get closer to the midterms. Today’s announcement seems to be made to win over the moderates in the party for the energy bill in the Senate.
Like healthcare reform not being about healthcare, this proposal is not about energy but about getting votes.
And one more thing—it seems Sarah Palin was right.
After 14 months, there’s a discernible pattern in how Obama operates and what his motives are.
In his most recent piece, Hanson puts it all together:
Utility means nothing. So long as the next proposed program enlarges a dependent constituency and is financed by the “rich” through higher taxes and more debt, it is, de facto, necessary and good. Equality of result is to be achieved both by giving more to some and by taking even more from others.
[A]fter 14 months [...] the Obama particulars add up to a remaking of America that is now clear and consistent: Grow government; redistribute income; establish permanent political constituencies of dependents; increase entitlements; hike taxes; demonize “them” while deifying their supposed victims; seek global neutrality abroad; and always play fast and loose with the truth.
God bless him:
Political pressure might become so intense that President Obama would agree to repeal major portions of the healthcare bill he signed into law recently, Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) said today.
Even if Republicans win Congress in 2010, Obama could veto any legislation repealing healthcare reform. But McCain suggested the public might feel so strongly that Obama would cave.
“If the intensity level is as high as it is, I can draw you a scenario where the president would be forced to repeal or really replace it with the provisions [Republicans] wanted,” McCain said in an interview with KFYI 550.
What can you say after statements like that? Keep in mind that this was the Republican party’s candidate for President less than two years ago. Completely devoid of any political reality.
One wonders what the Senator would be saying if he wasn’t in a tough primary battle for his political life?
That the new healthcare law requires the hiring of over 16,000 new IRS agents tells you all you need to know about healthcare reform. It’s about government, not healthcare.
But the IRS says we have nothing to worry about:
[...]IRS Commissioner Douglas Shulman said taxpayers have nothing to fear.
“I think there have been some misconceptions out there,” Shulman told a House committee last week, insisting the new law will not fundamentally alter the relationship between the agency and taxpayers.
Shulman said the new health care law puts the onus on taxpayers to report their insurance coverage on tax forms much as they report income and interest earnings.
“All that will happen with the IRS is similar to a current 1099, where a bank sends the IRS a statement that says ‘here’s the interest’ someone owes, and they send it to the taxpayer,” he said. “We expect to get a simple form that … says this person has acceptable health coverage.”
He said the Department of Health and Human Services will set guidelines for what constitutes “acceptable” health coverage.
See? That’s all there is to it. It will be just like getting a 1099 in the mail every January. Except instead of it having to do with how much money you make, it will be about how much and what type of healthcare insurance you have.
And in five years, it will be about how much energy you use.
And five years after that, it will be about what kind of car you drive.
The bottom line is once you start feeding the beast, it will always demand more.
It’s all to attract the “big” donors, I’m sure:
A February RNC trip to California, for example, included a $9,099 stop at the Beverly Hills Hotel, $6,596 dropped at the nearby Four Seasons, and $1,620.71 spent [update: the amount is actually $1,946.25] at Voyeur West Hollywood, a bondage-themed nightclub featuring topless women dancers imitating lesbian sex.
RNC trips to other cities produced bills from a long list of chic and costly hotels such as the Venetian and the M Resort in Las Vegas, and the W (for a total of $19,443) in Washington. A midwinter trip to Hawaii cost the RNC $43,828, not including airfare.
My only question is this: at what point does the RNC realize that Michael Steele is more of a negative than a positive for the party? Hell, for that matter what are the positives? Have there ever been any?
Breaking: Tea Party activist charged with threatening to kill member of the Congressional Black Caucus
And when I say “Tea Party activist”, I really mean “extremist left-winger”. And when I say “Congressional Black Caucus member”, I really mean “conservative Republican”.
Actually a Muslim convert and Barack Obama supporter has been charged with threatening to kill the Jewish and white Eric Cantor, House Minority Whip.
How long will the White House, the Congressional Democrats and left-wing media types wait to denounce the hateful rhetoric and incendiary actions from the extreme right-wing left?